Incendiary Image of the Day: SIG SAUER Hearts No-Knock Raids Edition

I like SIG. So much so that I bought my own when my my agency switched to one from the Beretta 92. But I do not like the new full-page ad I just saw in my April edition of NRA’s American rifleman. Below a photo of a police team executing a forced entry is the copy, “BUILT FOR THOSE WHO REQUIRE NO INTRODUCTION.” There are many appropriate things to celebrate about our police forces when trying to sell a firearm . . .

but no-knock raids shouldn’t be one of them, especially considering the plethora of botched “no-introduction” raids in our country’s recent history and their often shaky Constitutional standing. Please change your ad and remove this celebration of organized intimidation and brute force.

comments

As horrible as the botched raids are, the successful ones (where no knock is warranted) far out number the “poor judgment” ones.

Until the bad ones are ID’d and learned from, just like the poor previous active shooter plans….nothing will be gained from speaking out against ALL of them. The add is fine and the letter will most likely be thrown in the trash of whatever intern reads it.

Militarized SWAT Teams need to stop using No-knock and Knock-and-Announce raids on suspects that are not considered a threat due to the charges and/or their past criminal history. “Training” for suspects that actually justify the use of a No-knock and Knock-and-Announce raids is not sufficient justification to continue this terroristic practice.

We need states to pass laws requiring PD’s to publicly disclose and provide justification for every single one of these raids before more LEO’s, innocent civilians and family pets die, particularly when these raids are completely unnecessary.

So the “few” dead innocents and all the dead dogs and busted doors and trashed houses are acceptable collateral damage? I guess that old saying “It is better to let a thousand guilty men walk free than to put one innocent man in jail” doesn’t apply any more. That IS was you’re saying, right?

That’s like arguing that the few dead innocent people are justification for banning all guns. A SWAT team is just like a gun, a background check, a no-knock raid etc. Merely a tool. If used wisely, it helps. If used unwisely, it causes harm.

Using a SWAT team to kick in the door, without prior announcement of course, of a guy who’s had multiple violent crimes charges? Sure. Kicking in the door of a guy who hasn’t payed his parking tickets? No bueno.

Amendment IV
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

No-knock raids are a military assault on American Citizens and are Evil and Must Be Stopped if we want to maintain the Republic our Founding Fathers established for us.

The key word in the fourth amendment is the freedom from UNREASONABLE searches and seizures. What is “reasonable” is decided by a judge on a case by case basis when issuing the warrant that authorizes the raid. The problem, of course, is that no knocks tend to get people killed, and there are often–but certainly not always–less intrusive means of accomplishing the arrest or search. What we are starting to see, and this is the unfortunate thing, that no knocks or night time raids are being authorized simply on the basis that there may be one or more firearms in a building–even if those arms are not owned or controlled by the subject of interest. In those cases, it would seem, everyone in a house is “detained” and handcuffed at gun point and the dog is shot, something most of us–I’d wager most people generally–find offensive.

That all depends on your definition of “warranted” and “success”, doesn’t it?

Sure, the majority of these raids accomplish their objective: Bad guys caught and nobody dies. When the authorities define “warranted” down to where a no-knock is justified if the police believe there are drugs that might be flushed, is that really a “warranted” raid? If you can achieve the same measure of success – bad guys caught and nobody dies – without kicking in doors and terrorizing people, wouldn’t it make more sense to reduce the likelihood that it all goes crosswise?

Especially when you look at the recorded instances of the wrong house, the wrong people, the wrong crime…

Yeah Rydak; just like it use to be legal to own a human being as a slave. If the only requirement for you is that some horrific act is “legal”, then line up with all those law abiding Germans that enforced the “legal” acts of the Nazis.

The shear violation and outright rape by some gang of armed faceless gun bearing enforcers breaking down the door of some one that is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty(remember; this person has not yet been charged with a crime) and if this innocent person is murdered defending their castle from this gang, the gang will just get a paid vacation on the dime of us all.

I almost never feel the level of shear hate the way I feel about No Knock warrants.

Just another indication of how far down the sewer of tyranny and the police state that that this type of violation is allowed to continue by we the people.

So a house full of hardened criminals should be allowed to have forewarning that the police are about to raid their asses all because some small town fucktards are abusing the practice? I think limiting the practice would be a much smarter idea.

Comparing an aggressive apprehension of criminals to genocide ? Well now, that escalated quickly ! Hey, I guess if it fits the agenda.

Which agenda are you speaking too? The agenda I’m speaking of is the militarization of the police. I’m speaking to the danger I face is usually not from some “hardened criminal”, Most of them mostly don’t pick a fight with a hardened target like myself that carries a weapon and has good situational awareness.

The only real danger I face is from a Swat raid that picked the wrong house and now I would be faced with a choice, are these ski masked invaders of my home the hardened criminals dressed as cops that will murder me once I put my gun down or are they cops that still might end shooting me and my dog because I didn’t put my gun down fast enough?

The fact that I have to make that choice is utterly and completely wrong. The fact that you defend such a choice by me and people like me is telling me your agenda is one that cares not for individual freedom and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure; your agenda is the continued growth of the police state; the only real danger a free people have to fear.

Because, in the end; the greatest murderer of the people is the “Hardened police state”.

The absurdity and shear madness Rydak; if it wasn’t for the police employing these tactics; the “hardened Criminals” wouldn’t be employing these tactics to gain entry into a home figuring that most people will surrender without a fight; because they might be cops.

It’s because of people like you Rydak, worshiping at the feet of the state, probably because your are an enforcer, or wish you were, that I have been placed in this position.

I am left with only one choice; who ever breaks down my door in the middle of the night is a violent criminal, whether they are “legal” or not and I will respond with violence, and the chips will fall as they lay.

Yep, it all stems from the change in cop mentality from “protect and serve one’s community” to “patrolling and controlling one’s sector of the battlefield.”

Good read: http://www.policymic.com/articles/60493/rise-of-the-warrior-cop-how-america-s-police-are-increasingly-like-the-military
“While Balko offers ample evidence, responses to the book have practically argued his point for him. One response on the popular website PoliceOne by Sgt. Glenn French of Sterling Heights, Michigan not only acknowledged the phenomenon, but defended/encouraged it. French’s essay stated that “We trainers have spent the past decade trying to ingrain in our students the concept that the American police officer works a battlefield every day he patrols his sector.” French goes on to say, “Cops on the beat are facing the same dangers on the streets as our brave soldiers do in war.” French goes on to endorse military capabilities and increased SWAT forces.

Perhaps Prince George’s County, Maryland is French’s ideal police sector. In 2009, SWAT teams were deployed an average of once a day. Were there that many hostage situations or drug lab raids? Nope. Most were to serve arrest or search warrants, often for misdemeanors.

French’s sector must be dangerous then. Once again, nope. Sterling Heights is the second-safest city in Michigan. There were 10 murders in a population of 130,000 (2008).”

What a tool. I was raised in, and still live near Sterling Heights, otherwise known as “Sterile Whites” when I was growing up there. It has changed a little in population make-up, but is still an upper middle class suburb. I still work there.
I am sure the guy is a big “Call of Duty” fan too.

They aren’t using them as originally intended, exigent circumstances where a crime is in progress. Home invasions and such. The vast majority of these raids are for nonviolent crimes like poker games and suspicion of selling drugs. Not kidnappers with hostages they can see through windows, these are people they’ve been watching for weeks, leading on, borderline entrapping with undercover cops and informers. People they could grab at a stoplight. Its like a sport for them.

There is nothing positive about no-knock raids in the single exception of exigency to protect life. In all other circumstances, nothing is gained that cannot be obtained through better approaches that are more consistent with the spirit of the 4th Amendment..

And don’t start your crap that No-Knocks are done with a lawful warrant, because…uh, that is subject to much debate. Just because judges sign does not make it Constitutional OR moral.

I said it when I was on the job, and I repeat it now: No-Knocks are crap and serve no useful purpose.

Ever since I started following Radley Balko’s blog, it is disturbing how frequently these botched raids occur across the United States and how little transparency is required of the PD’s that execute them.

What does make is constitutional? Your blessing? Because last time I read the constitution it didn’t mention needing to knock if you have a warrant, though there are certainly valid practical reasons why that should be necessary in most circumstances.

Hannibal wrote: “last time I read the constitution it didn’t mention needing to knock if you have a warrant”

“Knock and announce” (as we would call it today) is a long-standing common law principle pre-dating the United States that the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures was intended to preserve.

No one said they weren’t warrantless. Police were supposed to be required by law to announce their presence. Police are also not allowed to interpret a warrant to include properties or things not covered in the warrant. The idea of a den of drug dealers, armed to the teeth with machine guns hiding out in residences is just absurd fiction. Given how poor the training and discipline seems to be, if such extremely well armed and dangerous drug dealers existed, SWAT teams would be getting decimated regularly in the massive fire fights that would ensue. These things simply don’t happen. So why pedal hype and “potentials”, that’s what LIBERALS do.

Supposedly, under ordinary circumstances, they do. “No-knock” raids to serve warrants are supposed to be limited to “exigent circumstances”, e.g. the object of the search is something that could be easily and quickly destroyed if the officer had to “knock” or announce and wait to be let in. Did I misread your post, maybe you were being sarcastic? If so, I apologize.

They have to announce they are police. For their own safety and everyone elses. It’s been documented that criminals have taken advantage of the fact that cops do no-knock raids regularly now, to commit home invasions as well as murder their competitors, making everyone even less safe.

A bunch of LA cops got together and started doing no-knocks just to rip off drug-dealers so they could resell the drugs themselves. Check Wikipedia on “no-knock warrants.” No need to be a lawyer.

We have practices previously unthinkable today, including the service of no-knock warrants during the normal hours of sleep, something which had been considered unthinkable prior to the ’80’s. The war on drugs induced the Supreme Court to countenance the dramatic ten-fold increase in no-knock warrants and the service of warrants on homes during the normal hours of sleep. Did this curtain drug dealing? No. Next case.

You ever read a SWAT or Special Weapons mag? I was freaking horrified by what I read in there. They celebrate this crap, revel in it. There was a review on a kind of forklift breaching thing so they can no knock raid the second story of your house. The only thing I liked in it was an article on how police changed tactics on school shootings after Columbine, with the first guy on scene going in without waiting for backup.

Sig deffinately gets some love from Uncle Sam. Their sales are probably a fairly close split between private and government.
The sig mpx looks like an mp5 any skinny on the internals? Because frankly if I could is probably take the mp5 over this unless there’s something radically different between the two.

So I couldn’t find a main corporate email address, admittedly I only took 10 minutes of searching before I decided to email this letter to the Law Enforcement Sales department:

“To whom it may concern,

Your advertising slogan for the MPX line is highly offensive and controversial by promoting a divide and a war between law enforcement and civilians, specifically the line, “Built for those who require no introduction.” At a time in the United States where there are an increasing number of innocent people being hurt and killed by law enforcement SWAT teams utilizing “no knock” warrants, this is not the type of advertising I would think Sig Sauer would like to use in publications such as American Rifleman. I fully understand the intent of the weapon and the fact that it is restricted to LEO and government purchase, but you are not using that advertising only in publications and sites that are restricted to those people. The tagline is on your own publicly accessed website as well!

“No knock” warrants are a product of the failed drug war and have contributed to the militarization of many police departments across the United States. This divide is only become wider with each passing day, especially as those groups and politicians who are vehemently against the Second Amendment rights of U.S. citizens push for more and more gun control. The rhetoric engage by these groups is only inflaming the normal every day gun owners of America, as it is intended to do. Sig Sauer is a fantastic manufacturer of fine firearms, so do you really want to alienate and enrage most of your customers? Do you also think that you will be able to maintain profit by only supplying municipal and other governmental agencies? Some towns, such as Jersey City, N.J. are starting to question the manufacturers; who they sell to, what safety “issues” they may have, do they support draconian gun control laws, etc., etc.

I do hope you reconsider using this advertising campaign for your MPX line of firearms. As I stated before, I have no problem with the intent and the design of the weapon, nor its intended user. I would love to have one for my own shooting hobby, which of course is not possible due to a ridiculous U.S. law. Unfortunately, the advertising is beginning to receive some negative attention from the civilian gun owners and hobbyists online, and will probably spread. The particular advertising is nothing more than a poor choice of words, and again I hope you reconsider.”

Figured I’d let my voice be heard and give Sig a chance to change before I have the chance to buy one, otherwise I’ll be spending that money on another company.

Glad someone caught this. The deaf guys, dogs and occupants of wrong addresses shot in botched raids aren’t applauding the machismo of the no-knock warrant. Neither are man of us average gun owners, apparently.

Someone busting down my door would send me immediately to my home defense weapon. Damn then they shoot me in the heat of the moment. Or I shoot them heaven forbid. Scary shit that shouldn’t happen. There was a gang breakin a coupla years around here. Shot dog beat up man n woman. They thought drugs were in home. I want to be ready and no I don’t have drugs here.

NRA membership expired. Didn’t see this Sig ad.Yep I find this offensive. No knock raids conjure up images of the Gestapo. One would think Sig Sauer was smarter than to offend potential buyers. I guess not.

I have noticed a trend among all firearm magazines to show a lot of advertisements that glorify the hyper bad ass warrior cop. This needs to stop. I am not as concerned about the militarization (I use many military items and arms myself) of our police as I am about the federalization and nazification of the police forces. The attitude now is simply shut up, obey and submit or we’ll light you up. Remember when we were told the taser would only be used as an alternative to deadly force, now it is used to force compliance on a regular basis. I would like these company feature regular citizens and attractive females instead of tattooed thugs with badges in their adds.

This! No-knocks on homes are unnecessary. What is remarkable to me is that police have available to them such automatic surveillance and communications equipment, and yet they still think there is an advantage to breaking in. The war on drugs is definitely the only thing that motivated the courts, who didn’t understand the thing. Make booze illegal for six months, and see if the courts start to understand the lunacy of no-knocks for drugs. Every dealer’s got to leave the house sometime. Put him on a buzzer. Use face ID. Heck, break a window and throw in a two-way radio and a remote speaker. There just isn’t a need sufficient to justify the risks to both sides. And New Hampshire is still one of the last sane states in the Republic.

Agree that they couldn’t have thought it would be interpreted as we are doing. Insensitive on their part, though. If they wanted to live in a state ruled by jack-booted bullies, my ancestors would have remained in Salisbury. Why risk the ocean voyage? Disgruntled native americans? Possible starvation?

I disagree. The weapon is built for those who (themselves) need no introduction, as in don’t introduce themselves; not those who don’t need an introduction to SIG products.
There is no way the phrase “need no introduction” and a picture of police stacked up preparing for an unannounced entry is coincidence.

The first time I saw this ad it p!ssed me off. I already think Sig makes ugly pistols, but it wasn’t till the ad that I firmly decided I would never own a Sig product. How could a gun company be so out of touch with the current political climate or the concerns of American gun owners?

I agree that SIG makes great weapons, I own seven of them, but they goofed here. The screening criteria used for no knock entry is the same as that applied for issuing a permit to carry in NYC although the answers are inversed. That criteria includes only three questions only one of which needs to be answered as required;

1. Are you wealthy?
2. Are you a celebrity?
3. Are you a wealthy celebrity?

I disagree with Rydak, there in no such thing as a good no knock entry. ANY entry that violates the 4th amendment is not a good entry I don’t care how successful some PD thinks it is. I guess he thinks all the amendments are good except the 4th, which he will probably tell us is good except sometimes. That amendment was put in there for a reason, the very reason that it is being violated by law enforcement now. Do I like crooks? No, but the crooks that they are after are no worse criminal than the cop that violates someone’s rights by breaking and entering his domicile without a proper announcement. And what is it wit cops and fully covering their face with black ski masks? Seriously, if on the middle of the night if someone kicked my front door in and came running in with a ski mask on I WILL be defending myself. And the cops can’t understand why the public in general does not trust or have any respect for them.

Maybe it’s just me, but at first I was thinking the (poor) phrasing meant that “built for those that everyone knows about.” Most people know about SWAT police and the dangerous situations they are called into, hence, no need for introduction. I didn’t get at first it was about “no-knock” raids. I, of course, could be wrong.